OLED refresh rate race heats up as SDC claims first 720Hz display

[Daniel Sims]

The big picture: Samsung became the first company to launch a 500Hz OLED display last month, but Chinese manufacturer Super Display Company (SDC) claims to have already exceeded 700Hz. However, crucial details regarding the company's monitor remain unclear, including the resolution at which it achieves its maximum refresh rate.

Reddit user "HM204DTA" recently shared an advertisement for a WOLED monitor capable of reaching 720Hz. If the product exists, manufacturer SDC has taken the lead in the high-refresh-rate OLED arms race.

The flyer is currently the only evidence of the monitor's existence. The 1440p QHD panel defaults to 540Hz, already making it the fastest OLED monitor at that resolution. Samsung recently began shipping the 500Hz QHD OLED G6 in Southeast Asian countries, and ViewSonic is set to launch a similar display at an unspecified date.

Meanwhile, TN panels recently began reaching higher refresh rates at 1080p. Recently unveiled products from Acer and MSI can achieve 600Hz, while the Koorui G7, at 750Hz, is the fastest commercial monitor overall. While HM204DTA noted that SDC's monitor only reaches 720Hz at resolutions below 1440p (probably 1080p), it still represents a significant achievement for OLED technology.

Oddly, however, the 26.5-inch panel only supports DisplayPort 1.4 and HDMI 2.1, which might make reaching the maximum refresh rate difficult, likely requiring Display Stream Compression and precise tuning. Furthermore, while the HDR 500-rated monitor can reach a peak brightness of 1,500 nits, at full brightness it falls to 335 nits.

Other stats include a 99.5% P3 color gamut, a 1.5 million-to-1 contrast ratio, and a 0.03ms response time. Pricing remains unclear, but SDC offers a three-year burn-in warranty, and the monitor is rated for a lifetime of 30,000 hours.

Also read: The Best 1440p Gaming Monitors

Most users are likely content playing games and viewing content at 60 frames per second, and 120fps is becoming more common on consoles and TVs. However, pushing higher can dramatically improve motion clarity, especially when observing fast-moving objects. Refresh rates like 240Hz, 360Hz, and 540Hz can revive the motion clarity that older users might remember from CRTs during the 80s, 90s, and 2000s.

Still, achieving those framerates in modern games is another challenge. At several hundred frames per second, CPU limitations can become a bigger obstacle than GPU constraints, depending on the game. Users may also run into framerate caps. The release of the Nvidia RTX 4090 in 2022 prompted Blizzard to raise Overwatch 2's cap to 600fps, but now that might not be enough.

Permalink to story:

OLED refresh rate race heats up as SDC claims first 720Hz display

 

[godrilla]

Monitor vendors have kilohertz-philia but dp2.1 phobia.

 

[ScottSoapbox]

This is just getting silly.

 

[NumberNine]

OLEDs are destroyed by exposure to sunlight and stationary pixels. I'll pass until those issues are fully resolved and they achieve reliability on par with LEDs.

 

[yRaz]

This is just getting silly.

I cant see anything past 120/144. Maybe if I was a 12 year old on Adderall I might be able to see more, but I really dont understand what's the point anymore.

 

[RaXelliX]

OLEDs are destroyed by exposure to sunlight and stationary pixels. I'll pass until those issues are fully resolved and they achieve reliability on par with LEDs.

Stationary pixels only hurt OLED's if they're bright (white) and displayed for thousands of hours in the same location like a TV channel logo. The sunlight is universal. It's a bad idea to leave anything exposed to direct sunlight for prolonged periods.

 

[RaXelliX]

Monitor vendors have kilohertz-philia but dp2.1 phobia.

Aint that the truth.

 

[RaXelliX]

This is just getting silly.

Not until we get to 1000Hz to match CRT's.

 

[yRaz]

Not until we get to 1000Hz to match CRT's.

The horizontal scan rate of CRTs is not same thing as the "update" rate which is represented in hz. Typical CRT refresh rates on PCs were 75-90hz

 

[godrilla]

The horizontal scan rate of CRTs is not same thing as the "update" rate which is represented in hz. Typical CRT refresh rates on PCs were 75-90hz

Also oled is often 1.5x that of traditional TN panel in terms of motion clarity from recollection.

 

[yRaz]

Also oled is often 1.5x that of traditional TN panel in terms of motion clarity from recollection.

I saw thisn240hz Samsung oled ultrawide (I think it was a WOLED panel) and it was a completely different experience. Im confident it had nothing to do with the refresh rate and everything to do with actual pixel response time/switching rate. Its the only time I've felt I could see something higher than 120/144. However, to reiterate, I feel was the panel and had nothing to do with the refresh rate.

 

[p51d007]

When 120hz refresh was "really starting" to be a thing, my new phone at the time was out of the box at 120. I played with it a while, then switched it to 60hz. Couldn't see a difference. Then I went around to coworkers and said hey! Look how smooth my phone is with 120 hz. They all thought it was 120hz until I showed them it was only 60.

 

[daffy duck]

So e-sports is now the dominant form of gaming?

 

[airbornex]

Amazing progress, but we’re well into diminishing returns land for casual users. For most people, the jump from 120Hz to 240Hz is noticeable — beyond that it’s mostly niche benefits for hardcore esports players or people chasing that old CRT feel.

 

[MaXtor]

Not until we get to 1000Hz to match CRT's.

High refresh is not the benefit CRTs still have; it's zero perceivable input lag and motion blur despite having much lower refresh rates than modern monitors.

 

[ScottSoapbox]

I cant see anything past 120/144. Maybe if I was a 12 year old on Adderall I might be able to see more, but I really dont understand what's the point anymore.

I can see and feel 200ish but only need that for competitive shooters, otherwise, I cap games at 140.

I can understand actual pros (and kids that want think their pros) getting 480 as I think Linus did a video with a pro gamer that did perform better in their tests with various refreshes.

But we've hit the point that it's just a bigger number on the box. "Our monitor is 0.7 milliseconds faster!" (0.00138 sec 720 vs 0.00208 sec 480)

 

[johnwinter87]

I can see and feel 200ish but only need that for competitive shooters, otherwise, I cap games at 140.

I can understand actual pros (and kids that want think their pros) getting 480 as I think Linus did a video with a pro gamer that did perform better in their tests with various refreshes.

But we've hit the point that it's just a bigger number on the box. "Our monitor is 0.7 milliseconds faster!" (0.00138 sec 720 vs 0.00208 sec 480)

Yeah, at this point it feels like we’re chasing numbers more than noticeable improvements. I get the edge it might give in esports at the highest level, but for 99% of use cases — including most competitive gaming — the difference between 480Hz and 700Hz is practically imperceptible. I’d be more interested in consistent low latency and image quality than just raw refresh rate.

 

[RaXelliX]

The horizontal scan rate of CRTs is not same thing as the "update" rate which is represented in hz. Typical CRT refresh rates on PCs were 75-90hz

High refresh is not the benefit CRTs still have; it's zero perceivable input lag and motion blur despite having much lower refresh rates than modern monitors.

Not my point. What im saying is that current monitors need 1000Hz to match CRT that was running at much lower refresh. They need 1000Hz to overcome inherit limitation of the technology vs CRT as even current OLED's are sample-and-hold.

 

[RaXelliX]

When 120hz refresh was "really starting" to be a thing, my new phone at the time was out of the box at 120. I played with it a while, then switched it to 60hz. Couldn't see a difference. Then I went around to coworkers and said hey! Look how smooth my phone is with 120 hz. They all thought it was 120hz until I showed them it was only 60.

Not everyone perceives motion the same way. Some people cant tell the difference between 60Hz and 120Hz. Most can. I know immediately if it's 60Hz when I have seen 120Hz or more on that screen. I even noticed a small uplift when I went from 165Hz monitor to a 200Hz monitor. Tho there it was 9 years of panel advancement (vs my old monitor) and the addition of QD layer that further helped the image quality. Resolution stayed the same.